michel123456

(emphasis mine) That is the point. All imagery of the Big Bang represent a starting point. Only by words you can state that "the Big Bang happened everywhere". IMHO once a layman understands that current Theory states that the entire Universe puffed into existence roughly in place where it exists now, it can only but raise astonishment and profound doubt.

Space is made of 3 dimensions. I guess you don't question the existence of space. And we know from physics that time & space are interlaced. Physicists talk about Spacetime. What is time for me can be space for another. So, if you believe that space exist, why do you question the existence of time?

Correct. As stated by Spyman, here we have space reduced in 2D, and 1D for time. There is no hyper-spatial curvature represented here. In this diagram, Space is flat planar disk and have an edge. It is a spacetime diagram. Once you put T as an axis, and space as the 2 other axes, it is a spacetime diagram. And it is definitely not a representation of the Observable Universe. In a spacetime diagram, the Observable Universe is a cone.

In this case, each disk is hollow. Or lets say these are not disks, but circles. Oops, something wrong here.

I'd like to discuss this point, because I believe the diagram may still be misleading. As I see it, each solid planar disk represents space, full of stuff. Each disk represents the whole space as it is supposed to exist at a certain period of time.So, if we take a disk in the middle of the diagram, it represents space with everything in it. If we take a second disk, it represents again space with everything in it, but at another time. If we take a 3rd disk, again it represents space with everything in it, and so on. As a matter of consequence, this diagram shows a multiplication of "spaces filled with stuff" along the time-line. Or, for those who are familiar with space-time diagrams, stars & galaxies on this diagram are not point-like (as represented), but are lines.

I agree completely with your post #26 Spyman. I'll put a red cross on my calendar to remember this moment.

From Wolfram Mathworld: Spherical shell:"A spherical shell is a generalization of an annulus to three dimensions. A spherical shell is therefore the region between two concentric spheres of differing radii." The same exactly in Wikipedia It looks to me a spherical shell is a 3D object. Don't forget that another observator anywhere else in the Universe is supposed to observe the same thing as we do. The rotating motion is not easily compatible. And first of all we have to agree on what this diagram represents. The weird thing is that basically I agree with your points. Let's try to find a common ground: Your point comes from this (from Wiki): "In higher mathematics, a careful distinction is made between the sphere (a two-dimensional spherical surface embedded in three-dimensional Euclidean space) and the ball (the three-dimensional shape consisting of a sphere and its interior)." It is spherical shell of zero thickness. Let's go with it. In order to reduce this "two-dimensional spherical surface" in a circle, you can go like this: fig.2 In this fig.2, it is not a projection anymore, but a section of the sphere. The good thing is that radius is conserved and can be measured accurately on the reducted image. The bad thing is that we have lost most astral abjects. There is a way to conserve all objects, but I need time to make the diagram.

Not a gracious definition for the work of Life. Generally speaking, I find that to consider the brain as the only receptacle of cognition is a reductive concept. Surely the brain is the place where information from senses is analyzed, but it looks evident to me that all the work is not made in the brain only. The work must be dissipated everywhere in each part of the body till the last cell. Not that a cell properly "thinks" as we understand it, but that even a single cell must have a basic cognition of its environnement, and a way to transmit this "cognition" to other cells, till it may reach the brain. Maybe this "cognition" is purely chemical in nature, along some "paths" as proposed above, I don't know. But there must be something.

I tried once to create a universe, and failed pathetically. IMHO you have to begin with more fundamental elements than matter and antimatter. I tried like this: _Nothing. Is nothing possible? Blah blah blah.

Most of them don't think at all.

just thinking: that is because you have only one zero. same thinking: you could have a several number of infinities, or an infinity of infinities, declaring that infinity1 is different from infinity2, and so on, all problem will vanish. As if you looked to infinity in all directions: these are all different infinities. Why do we have to reduce everything to only one infinity? and by extent, to one zero? It is just a problem of mathematical convention that do not permit the existence of different zero's and infinities. After more thinking, there must be several infinities in mathematics. ---------------------------- Let's try. If we replace infinity by any other symbol, we have: [math] \frac{A}{B}= C [/math] and [math] \frac{D}{B}= E [/math] where [math] {B} [/math] is any number, including infinity It is not difficult to see that if [math] {A}\neq {D} [/math] then [math] {C}\neq {E} [/math] So IF [math] \frac{A}{\infty}= zero [/math] & [math] \frac{D}{\infty}= zero' [/math] then zero and zero' are different. OR [math] \frac{A}{\infty}= zero [/math] is incorrect. Did I miss something?

Emphasis mine. And not only electric engines. Remember the velosolex. "The Vélosolex has a small 49cc motor mounted above the front wheel. Power is delivered via a small ceramic roller that rotates directly on the front wheel by friction to the tire."

Interesting Pioneer. comment: We are moving through time in only one direction. By the way,Time is not alone. There are other things that have only one direction. (is this philosophy & religion?) The question was : I don't understand the cause to effect relation. If nothing can be created or destroyed, why should it be impossible for things to change through time? And We don't know what time is in the first place. We don't know what nothing means, and we don't know anything about creation. Finally, we don't know what "exist" mean. The only thing we know something about is "impossible" and "destruction".

"Asimov's Chronology of Science and Discovery", Harper & Row Publishers, 1996 A collection of small articles you can read bit by bit. Delightful.

It is 8.00 in the morning, and the policeman is at the seaside. He looks at a little boy playing alone on the beach with his plastic bucket and his little spade. _what are you doing here, little boy? _I am making cops, answers the child. _Cops?? And how are you doing that? _Easy, I take some sand, some water and some shit, I put everything in the bucket and here you are: a cop. _Grmbl go out of here at once and never play again such a game, shouts the policeman. And the little boy goes away. The next morning, the boy is there again. The policeman approaches: _Good morning my boy, what are you doing today? _ I am making a fireman. _Good, good. And how do you make a fireman? _Easy, I take some sand, some water, I put everything in the bucket and here you are: a fireman. _Hum, and why don't you put some shit in it? _because if I put shit, it will become a cop. ------------------------------------- The old lady to the little boy: _What is your name? _Robert. _And how do mam and dad call you? _ROOO-BEEE-RT ----------------------------------- A couple of martians come to Earth to observe human behaviour. They go to the Amsterdam port at night, and enter a bar. It is bar for swinging partners, and nobody takes attention to their green look and their antennas. They begin a conversation with a young couple and decide to swap partners. So the human guy goes upstairs with the martian female, and the woman goes with the martian guy. In the room, the girl strips completely, and so does the martian. The girl is laughing, his penis is so tiny. _What is bothering you? No problem says the martian: he fiddles his left ear and zzzzz his penis becomes 2 feet long. _Not bad say the girl, but it's like a spaghetti. _No problem says the martian: he fiddles his right ear and wouzzz his penis grows like a balloon. And of course, they spend a wonderful night together. Next morning, the girl meets her boyfriend, the martians have left the bar incognito earlier. _How was your night? ask the boy. _Terrific, says the girl. How was yours? _Not bad, not bad, except that the green girl fiddle my ears all the time.

A man enters a supermarket, obviously searching something. The cashier notices the man going round and round , and finally ask him: _Hello Sir, may I help you? the client answers: _hgg llbhgr blmmmnah plokrrrblmmnwstzzz? the cashier understands immediately the man has a speech disorder. He asks again: _sorry, I did not understand clearly what you just said. And the man says: _bllmxxx gll hgg llbhgr blmmmnah plokrrrblmmnwstzzz? Then comes the second cashier: _Would you please repeat? _hgg llbhgr blmmmnah plokrrrblmmnwstzzz? All clients gather, even the director come to help: no way. The man gets nervous, repeating many times "bllmxxx gll hgg llbhgr blmmmnah plokrrrblmmnwstzzz?" After a while, the director says: I've got an idea. We have a guy who speaks like that, he works in the basement store. Go and find him, he may help". So they do. 3 minutes after the employee from the basement arrives. And a strange conversation takes place: _hgg llbhgr blmmmnah plokrrrblmmnwstzzz? _gll brrzzzfst bllmpftr zommmmhlbt (says the employee) _bllmpr (says the client) _dgdfg bllmxth shhh kcbrty. And the employee goes to the basement. He comes back with a box that he gives to the client. With a smile of relief, he gives some money to the employee, and leaves the supermarket. But at the end what was he asking for? ask everybody. And the employee turns and says: _hgg llbhgr blmmmnah plokrrrblmmnwstzzz ---------------------------------------------- Chicago. A drunken man comes out of a bar past midnight. After a few steps, he hears a voice behind him: _DRUNKARD! He looks back, and sees a crocodile. I'am drunk, he thinks, and continues to the next column. _DRUNKARD! He looks back again, the crocodile is still there, following him a few steps back. Never mind he thinks, and continues. _DRUNKARD! This time, he noticed that indeed the crocodile pronounced this word. Furious, he goes toward the crocodile who opens its mouth wide. He plunges his right hand into the crocodile's mouth, catch his tail from the inside, and pull dynamically the crocodile inside out like a sock. Happy of himself, the guy continues to the next column. Suddenly he hears behind him: _DRAKNURD!

and something else 2 things that do not appear in "my content" _a thread of mine placed in the trash can _a post of mine in the Official Jokes Section from The Lounge.

Actual definition of time is based on tautology. We don't know a thing about the "rate" of time. We use to assume that the tic tac of the clock is regular, but it is an assumption based on nothing. We are observing that the tic yesterday is the same as the tac today, but we are measuring and comparing time with time. If time changed in the meanwhile, we would still measure the tic & tac are the same. in this diagram from Ned Wright's tutorial, the rate of Time is transformed, and everything works fine:

I read this thread till page 45... I hope this one is new. Belgian joke. A old couple of Belgians go for winter holidays at Chamonix (France) for skiing. They go the reception desk of the ski station, asking for the wonderful same trainer they had last year. _What was his name? ask the receptionist. _We don't remember _What was he look like? maybe we can find him. _Oh, he was wearing a ski suit with blue white and red stripes. _We are in France, ALL trainers have suits with blue white and red stripes! Don't you remember anything else about him? _Hm. yes. He has 2 anus. _2 anus?? how do you know that? _Well, each day, when we went to the ski piste, the other trainers continuously asked him "how are you doing with your two assholes?". Sorry for my poor translation in english. Two Belgians go to Laponia hunting reindeer (caribou). They rent guns, a snow caterpillar track jeep and hire an eskimo guide for a week. After two days of search in the frozen woods, they find a group of caribous. They step out the jeep, and silently they approach the animals. With some help from the eskimo guide, they finally manage to shoot a beautiful caribou. So they walk in the snow, get next to the dead caribou. They tie a rope to his rear legs, and pull it in direction of the jeep. The eskimo guide explains that because of the direction of the caribou's fur, it would be easier to tie the rope at the antlers so that the deer can slide smoothly on the snow. And so they do. _Well, our eskimo guide was right, it is much easier now, says the first Belgian. _Yes, but we are getting more and more away from the jeep, replies the other.

This is your point of vue, and I bet you are wrong. We don't know that.

It reminds me the Eleatics, some 2500 years ago.

Here is how I understand Relativity (in a way that other people may laugh at) _it has nothing to do with relativity. Relativity principles were known by Galileo and Newton. _it has to do with the introduction of an absolute, the speed of light, and the way to conciliate this observational absolute with the well-known principles of relativity. Following Galileo and Newton, the concept of speed is relative: there is no such thing as an absolute speed, and under this premise talking about a constant or maximum speed is pure nonsense. Following Einstein, there is an absolute speed, C, which is constant, and which no massive object can attain. In order to make this concept "fit" into the older concepts of relativity, Einstein had to stretch and squeeze the concepts of Space & Time. In fact Einstein's Theory could have been named "Theory of Absolutivity" or "Theory of Constancy". In other words, Einstein's Relativity transforms Galileo's "nonsense" into a physical evidence. In my (poor) understanding, Einstein's Theory is an observational Theory, I mean it is a Theory in which an observational crucial element -C- has been inserted, and as a matter of consequence, all observations will always confirm the Theory. It is the snake who eats his own tail. So IMVHO it is an excellent Theory for describing what any observator will observe but not necessarily a Theory that depicts what really happens. Unless one consider that what we observe is identical to what happens.

Emphasis mine. If Energy = Force through Distance we shoud have E= m a d (no kidding) Where E energy, m mass, a acceleration, d distance. And the product a*d happen to be equal to C^2. Or to put it otherwise, we are living in a world in constant acceleration: it is the a factor in the equation.

Widdekind I don't understand your "augmented" mode. In this diagram, a sphere is represented as a disk, because 3D space has been reduced to 2D. I doubt you can reintroduce 3D space without getting errors. Actually I am at a point I agree with all I understand from your post. especially with this: My position on the subject has been throwned in the trash can some time ago. If you are not afraid you can still find it here. post #6 discuss the same diagram. I hope you will enjoy it, since I believe it is not far from your point of vue. Rules of this forum do not authorize to repost garbage.